Thanks, I'm happier now. It's a little funny that in the first diff you split out the Debug structure and in the second diff you fold it back in again... as I was reading the first diff I thought "didn't we decide not to do that?". Not a big deal, just seems redundant.
Committing the FIFO code for posterity seems OK to me. Steve On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Nathan Binkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In this new set of diffs, I've changed names of structure elements and > the corresponding comments to make steve happier. I've also added another > diff to the series that makes the event queue have the exact same LIFO > behaviour that it does now. I did not collapse the second and third diffs > because I thought it might be nice to have the FIFO mechanism in the history. > > Anyone have any comments? Any objection to the FIFO mechanism being > committed? Anyone going to push me to make the data structure a policy > type of the event queue? > _______________________________________________ > m5-dev mailing list > m5-dev@m5sim.org > http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev > _______________________________________________ m5-dev mailing list m5-dev@m5sim.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
